Thursday, 28 April 2011

@Richard Packham
I remember listening to GBH making a reference to the salamander letter during GC and he specifically said that it didn't really matter whether the document was real or a forgery, as it related to the Restoration claims. From this I gathered that they weren't convinced if its authenticity. I don't see why they had to receive a revelation (or at least publicly say so) when the forgery was eventually uncovered anyway. Revelations are not always necessary when we can also use our own resources.

nick humphrey 0 minutes ago in reply to Terry Anderson

"it didn't really matter whether the document was real or a forgery, as it related to the Restoration claims"
this is absolute hogwash. with that logic, anyone can make anything, tell the church it is a forgery and still expect the church to pay them lots of money for it as long as it "relates to restoration claims". c'mon, stop deceiving yourself. they were duped into thinking it was real that's why they "bought it". there's no magical holy ghost that uncovers hidden truth, this is just one example to support that. there are no consistent, testable, supernatural powers.

"Revelations are not always necessary when we can also use our own resources."
then apply that reasoning to the rest of your life.

i like this users comment too:

Patrick 6 months ago

The criticism for me is not that Prophets and Apostles got duped. I'm perfectly willing to let people be human and stupid at times. Everyone is. I've was always taught the pseudo-doctrine that Prophets are only perfect in teaching doctrine...(yeah, I know that one has issues too.)

For me, the biggest issue was and is that the Church censors its history by preventing access to historical documents. To me, this is dishonest, bordering on lying, to its members and the world.